RAZOR ANNOUNCES NEW 2010 POKER PRODUCT....

[huntah]

So what's the entry fee on the world series of poker, around $10g's? On heck of a redemption if you pull one and win the qualifying tournament.

Or if you suck like I do, sell to someone who thinks they can do it!

Ok, I want this bad! Seriously, I'm a regular on-line poker player and you can find me under the same user name as here on Poker Stars. I've won some satellites and often reach the top 50 players. I want to pull a redemption BADLY. Now, living over here, would that change anything? If it's only open to US residents then I guess I'm out of luck. I'd do a lot to get into the final 9 for a place at the WSOP!!!!

Always nice to see so many peoples knowing how to run a business perfectly, I don't understand why so many multi-milionaire business wizards still on this board 12 hours per day, but anyway. It's probably like the Internet poker. The more you drop in $$ limits, the more experts you found!

I think we have a good question here. I'm in Canada and I would like to know if the satellite is open to us as well?

 

[Razor]

So what's the entry fee on the world series of poker, around $10g's? On heck of a redemption if you pull one and win the qualifying tournament.

Or if you suck like I do, sell to someone who thinks they can do it!

Ok, I want this bad! Seriously, I'm a regular on-line poker player and you can find me under the same user name as here on Poker Stars. I've won some satellites and often reach the top 50 players. I want to pull a redemption BADLY. Now, living over here, would that change anything? If it's only open to US residents then I guess I'm out of luck. I'd do a lot to get into the final 9 for a place at the WSOP!!!!

Always nice to see so many peoples knowing how to run a business perfectly, I don't understand why so many multi-milionaire business wizards still on this board 12 hours per day, but anyway. It's probably like the Internet poker. The more you drop in $$ limits, the more experts you found!

I think we have a good question here. I'm in Canada and I would like to know if the satellite is open to us as well?

Open to canada as well. BG

 

[Crash Davis]

it's probably just an off the cuff statement Crash


Let's face it most wax has about a %15-%35 secondary market return (another off the cuff statement with no research at all.)


I personally think people are nuts for ripping products like oval office, but hey people do nutty things in this hobby all the time. I once saw a guy open 3 cases of topps co-signers, man that was brutal.

Three cases of Topps Co-Signers is beyond brutal.

But to attribute that extremely irresponsible statement to "off-the-cuff" is simply ridiculous. Why make such an outlandish statement. It's obviously impossible to back up such a statement with statistics. And for you to make that statement, Chris, is irrelevant because you do not own or operate a sportscard manufacturing company. Brian, as the owner of Razor, should be held to a much higher ethical standard in terms of his statements with respect to his products.

When statements like that come from the horses mouth, it makes it that much more irresponsible. If you made that statement as an owner of a hedge-fund (oh, my hedge-fund outperforms 95% of all hedge-funds), you'd be required to have statistical proof that proves that claim. And if you don't or your data proves to be false or fraudulent, you pay huge fines and/or spend time behind bars. But, since we're in the game of sports cards, the owner of a card manufacturer can say whatever he wants, without any factual data to back it up, and it gets chalked up to "off-the-cuff."

 

[Razor]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.[/quote]


If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG

 

[cgilmo]

it's probably just an off the cuff statement Crash


Let's face it most wax has about a %15-%35 secondary market return (another off the cuff statement with no research at all.)


I personally think people are nuts for ripping products like oval office, but hey people do nutty things in this hobby all the time. I once saw a guy open 3 cases of topps co-signers, man that was brutal.

Three cases of Topps Co-Signers is beyond brutal.

But to attribute that extremely irresponsible statement to "off-the-cuff" is simply ridiculous. Why make such an outlandish statement. It's obviously impossible to back up such a statement with statistics. And for you to make that statement, Chris, is irrelevant because you do not own or operate a sportscard manufacturing company. Brian, as the owner of Razor, should be held to a much higher ethical standard in terms of his statements with respect to his products.

When statements like that come from the horses mouth, it makes it that much more irresponsible. If you made that statement as an owner of a hedge-fund (oh, my hedge-fund outperforms 95% of all hedge-funds), you'd be required to have statistical proof that proves that claim. And if you don't or your data proves to be false or fraudulent, you pay huge fines and/or spend time behind bars. But, since we're in the game of sports cards, the owner of a card manufacturer can say whatever he wants, without any factual data to back it up, and it gets chalked up to "off-the-cuff."

You know probably better than I do the nature of sports card companies. So much stuff is just thrown out there "off the cuff" by every single company. Granted topps makes no secondary market claims, but they throw other stuff out there that ends up not being true.

Seriously man, I really think you are thinking too hard. If people wanna buy oval office then by all means let them. Let them decide based on the advertising and the product what is and what isn't.

 

[Crash Davis]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG[/quote]

I don't gamble, which is why I never purchased one of your Oval Office packs in the first place; and based on the many dissatsfied customers who posted their displeasure of this stuff on these very boards, I'm pretty sure that you'd be hard-pressed to prove your statement.

Having said that, you keep throwing out these comparisons by utilizing an unrealistic model which focuses solely on "factory cost," which is an apples-to-oranges comparison because, again, the common collector doesn't have the opportunity to purchase packs and/or boxes at "factory cost."

Shoot, furniture is overpriced; however, if I could get it at factory cost, which is generally 75% less than the retail value set in your neighborhood furniture store, it wouldn't be so bad. But the truth is, unless there's a sale or I know somebody who works there or the manufacturer and/or distributor myself (or I own one), I'm stuck buying the furniture at retail.

It's OK, though. You like to make the numbers work for you despite of the fact that they don't work for most anyone else.

And calling me a Topps shill doesn't obscure the fact that anyone with a calculator can figure out that nine cards @ $500 and one card $10,000 gets you to that magic number of a 90% return on a $1500 "factory cost."

So the truth is, based on your model, that nine out of every 10 packs of Oval Office is a ****** exam in a BGS case, which isn't terrible odds considering what you can get out of that 10th pack; however, to trumpet these numbers the way that you did, to skew them and misconstrue them, is just plain irresponsible.

Good luck.

 

[Crash Davis]

it's probably just an off the cuff statement Crash


Let's face it most wax has about a %15-%35 secondary market return (another off the cuff statement with no research at all.)


I personally think people are nuts for ripping products like oval office, but hey people do nutty things in this hobby all the time. I once saw a guy open 3 cases of topps co-signers, man that was brutal.

Three cases of Topps Co-Signers is beyond brutal.

But to attribute that extremely irresponsible statement to "off-the-cuff" is simply ridiculous. Why make such an outlandish statement. It's obviously impossible to back up such a statement with statistics. And for you to make that statement, Chris, is irrelevant because you do not own or operate a sportscard manufacturing company. Brian, as the owner of Razor, should be held to a much higher ethical standard in terms of his statements with respect to his products.

When statements like that come from the horses mouth, it makes it that much more irresponsible. If you made that statement as an owner of a hedge-fund (oh, my hedge-fund outperforms 95% of all hedge-funds), you'd be required to have statistical proof that proves that claim. And if you don't or your data proves to be false or fraudulent, you pay huge fines and/or spend time behind bars. But, since we're in the game of sports cards, the owner of a card manufacturer can say whatever he wants, without any factual data to back it up, and it gets chalked up to "off-the-cuff."

You know probably better than I do the nature of sports card companies. So much stuff is just thrown out there "off the cuff" by every single company. Granted topps makes no secondary market claims, but they throw other stuff out there that ends up not being true.

Seriously man, I really think you are thinking too hard. If people wanna buy oval office then by all means let them. Let them decide based on the advertising and the product what is and what isn't.

It's not that Chris - I could care less what other people buy. I just hate it when people make outlandish claims like the one Brian made. People spend their hard-earned money on this crap. He's the owner of the company and should make responsible statements. Period.

 

[mchenrycards]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG[/quote]

Not to be a ******* but name dropping is, well its beneath you Brian. I just found this a little on the holier than thou side along with the "my time is valuable" quote.

 

[bodiaz]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG

Not to be a ******* but name dropping is, well its beneath you Brian. I just found this a little on the holier than thou side along with the "my time is valuable" quote.[/quote]


Sounds like somebody is jealous? A little sensitive on his choice of words and phrase aren't you? I think that is what alot of the Razor bashing is about. You have a down to earth front man that is willing to mix it up with a bunch of nobodies on a trade board and inevitably it will turn into the nobodies insulting and hateing on the big shot. Happens all the time in every form of life. This is why you don't see big time athletes of CEOs of Topps/UD on boards, jealousy always pops its ugly head in.

 

[huntah]

"It's not that Chris - I could care less what other people buy. I just hate it when people make outlandish claims like the one Brian made. People spend their hard-earned money on this crap. He's the owner of the company and should make responsible statements. Period."


lol. People are buying what they want, period. They know the price, they know what they are buying and they take the decision. If you want to call it crap it's your choice. I'm calling Croc shoes crap and I'm not buying them. If I'm stupid enough one day, to buy them and after come on a forum to insult the manufacturer, please shoot me.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG

Not to be a ******* but name dropping is, well its beneath you Brian. I just found this a little on the holier than thou side along with the "my time is valuable" quote.

Sounds like somebody is jealous? A little sensitive on his choice of words and phrase aren't you? I think that is what alot of the Razor bashing is about. You have a down to earth front man that is willing to mix it up with a bunch of nobodies on a trade board and inevitably it will turn into the nobodies insulting and hateing on the big shot. Happens all the time in every form of life. This is why you don't see big time athletes of CEOs of Topps/UD on boards, jealousy always pops its ugly head in.[/quote]

1) You assume the front man is "down to earth".
2) You also assume that the front man does not have a holier than thou attitude.
3) Very few people are jealous of Razor, or what Brian Gray does. I believe more people are upset as to the damage he and his money have inflicted on the prospecting game of 2008-2010, as well as the monetary damages caused by Razor based on Brian Gray's assertions and subsequent decision to produce and eBay-distribute Metal.

 

[huntah]

Sounds like somebody is jealous? A little sensitive on his choice of words and phrase aren't you? I think that is what alot of the Razor bashing is about. You have a down to earth front man that is willing to mix it up with a bunch of nobodies on a trade board and inevitably it will turn into the nobodies insulting and hateing on the big shot. Happens all the time in every form of life. This is why you don't see big time athletes of CEOs of Topps/UD on boards, jealousy always pops its ugly head in.[/quote]

1) You assume the front man is "down to earth".
2) You also assume that the front man does not have a holier than thou attitude.
3) Very few people are jealous of Razor, or what Brian Gray does. I believe more people are upset as to the damage he and his money have inflicted on the prospecting game of 2008-2010, as well as the monetary damages caused by Razor based on Brian Gray's assertions and subsequent decision to produce and eBay-distribute Metal.

Damage?

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

Tiresome.

The horse has been flogged and flogged, but the fact remains that this post should concern the Razor Poker product, not some bantering about the past that clearly doesn't need to be rehashed. It's insane.

What ever happened to "What have you done for me lately?" That's what this thread should be about, not rehashed garbage about the pros and cons of Metal, box values of Letterman, or a general pile-on thread.

Let's get back to topic.

If you want to hammer the Poker product, hammer away...but no more of the inane regurgitation of previous threads.

And the comical thing here is that everyone seems to think positively about the poker product...and yet we have to deal with this?

 

[Jaypers]

Tiresome.

The horse has been flogged and flogged, but the fact remains that this post should concern the Razor Poker product, not some bantering about the past that clearly doesn't need to be rehashed. It's insane.

What ever happened to "What have you done for me lately?" That's what this thread should be about, not rehashed garbage about the pros and cons of Metal, box values of Letterman, or a general pile-on thread.

Let's get back to topic.

If you want to hammer the Poker product, hammer away...but no more of the inane regurgitation of previous threads.

And the comical thing here is that everyone seems to think positively about the poker product...and yet we have to deal with this?

Thanked.

 

[Weimer]

Tiresome.

The horse has been flogged and flogged, but the fact remains that this post should concern the Razor Poker product, not some bantering about the past that clearly doesn't need to be rehashed. It's insane.

What ever happened to "What have you done for me lately?" That's what this thread should be about, not rehashed garbage about the pros and cons of Metal, box values of Letterman, or a general pile-on thread.

Let's get back to topic.

If you want to hammer the Poker product, hammer away...but no more of the inane regurgitation of previous threads.

And the comical thing here is that everyone seems to think positively about the poker product...and yet we have to deal with this?

Did you really honestly expect anything less with a new Razor thread? It happens every single time. You said so yourself.

 

[cgilmo]

[youtube:8d8j8jd3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ8ViYIeH04[/youtube:8d8j8jd3]

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

Tiresome.

The horse has been flogged and flogged, but the fact remains that this post should concern the Razor Poker product, not some bantering about the past that clearly doesn't need to be rehashed. It's insane.

What ever happened to "What have you done for me lately?" That's what this thread should be about, not rehashed garbage about the pros and cons of Metal, box values of Letterman, or a general pile-on thread.

Let's get back to topic.

If you want to hammer the Poker product, hammer away...but no more of the inane regurgitation of previous threads.

And the comical thing here is that everyone seems to think positively about the poker product...and yet we have to deal with this?

Did you really honestly expect anything less with a new Razor thread? It happens every single time. You said so yourself.

Actually, I have no problem with people being critical of any product, as long as it is on topic, but none of the bashing or criticism has anything to do with the new poker product.

This entire thread seems to be nothing but less eloquent echos of previous threads, with the exception of the actual on-topic comments and posts.

 

[Weimer]

Tiresome.

The horse has been flogged and flogged, but the fact remains that this post should concern the Razor Poker product, not some bantering about the past that clearly doesn't need to be rehashed. It's insane.

What ever happened to "What have you done for me lately?" That's what this thread should be about, not rehashed garbage about the pros and cons of Metal, box values of Letterman, or a general pile-on thread.

Let's get back to topic.

If you want to hammer the Poker product, hammer away...but no more of the inane regurgitation of previous threads.

And the comical thing here is that everyone seems to think positively about the poker product...and yet we have to deal with this?

Did you really honestly expect anything less with a new Razor thread? It happens every single time. You said so yourself.

Actually, I have no problem with people being critical of any product, as long as it is on topic, but none of the bashing or criticism has anything to do with the new poker product.

This entire thread seems to be nothing but less eloquent echos of previous threads, with the exception of the actual on-topic comments and posts.

Oh I completely agree with you. I was just saying I didn't really expect anything but what's been happening. Every single Razor thread turns into a big argument and Razor bash fest about previous products and people not agreeing with Brian. It's nothing new and really shouldn't surprise anyone at this point.

 

[mchenrycards]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG

Not to be a ******* but name dropping is, well its beneath you Brian. I just found this a little on the holier than thou side along with the "my time is valuable" quote.

Sounds like somebody is jealous? A little sensitive on his choice of words and phrase aren't you? I think that is what alot of the Razor bashing is about. You have a down to earth front man that is willing to mix it up with a bunch of nobodies on a trade board and inevitably it will turn into the nobodies insulting and hateing on the big shot. Happens all the time in every form of life. This is why you don't see big time athletes of CEOs of Topps/UD on boards, jealousy always pops its ugly head in.[/quote]

Are you kidding me?? Jealous???

Brian and I have run in some of the same circles (although admittedly not on the highest level as he has) I owned a card shop that had significant sales that allowed me to forge relationships with many people within the industry. Oddly enough I spent many many dollars with Edgeman, which is Brian's former business and that is something I believe he will even confirm...but he doesnt need to. Add is the fact that some higher performing card shops get invited to roundtable discussions with manufacturers to offer opinions on products (I have participated in Topps and UD roundtables) and have attended many of the sales seminars that Topps used to promote across the nation. These seminars included the attendance of many higher ups who requested our thoughts on Topps products. I have attended 4 such Topps seminars. (I know...you are happy for me) And the fact that I spent seven years in major league baseball (in the front office for a national league team) and met many of the people that shaped sportscard policy for MLB and MLBPA would also give an indication that jealousy is not an issue with me.

Your type of post really ticks me off because you really dont know who you are talking about when you make stupid statements about someone else on a message board. Yes this thread may have gone on too long and my post might be a little over the top but to you Bodiaz...I say shut the he** up because you dont know who or what you are talking about. I think this post made me snap and want to fire back on message board idiots like bodiaz when they really dont have a freaking clue. Maybe Bodiaz you need to get off the computer in the school library and get back to class instead of being on a message board in th emiddle of the day.

 

[Razor]

[quote="Crash Davis":ukivij4w]

You just don't get it.

I repeated your words. You said your product was a good value @ factory cost (1500) in response to poster who said that most everyone who bought your Presidential Cuts product got their ass handed to them. You never defended your product at the current retail price.

To be fair based upon your statement would be to compare Topps UFC 1 @ FACTORY COST, which was much $69 I believe, and NOT the 350-400 you quotes. Again, you twist and turn the facts so as to make your product look much better than it really is. I respect the salesman aspect of your game, but you seem to take a lot of people on these boards for fools, which they are not

I am going to take the advice of some wise members and not argue with you in this forum.
It is clear you are not a fan of our brand, which is totally fine.
I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today.

I will end this conversation with you by saying that your relationships with another manufacturer do somewhat taint the sincerity of your "constructive criticism". But regardless, I appreciate your feedback and it has been noted.

BG

Not looking for an argument, Brian. I'm looking for an answer, which you obviously had/have no intention of providing.

This statement really got me laughing:

"I will stand behind the fact that Oval office (even at $2700) had you broken all 99 boxes returns more than 95% of all products produced today."

How can you say that with a straight face? That's like Bernie Madoff saying: "I guarantee that you will get 20% return on your investment every year no matter what"

I'm curious to see the market research you, or your Team, performed to back up that statement.

If I want to argue with a Topps shill, Ill just call John, Warren, Scott or one of my buddies at Topps directly.

In the interim, offer me a substantial wager (my time is valuable) and Ill run a model showing how bad the return is on new products in general (under 25%). Oval yielded over 90% at factory cost (which is approximately 50% even at the secondary market inflated $2700). Just because you pull a $500 card doesnt account for the guys that pulled $10k plus cards! Truth is in the numbers...

BG[/quote:ukivij4w]

I don't gamble, which is why I never purchased one of your Oval Office packs in the first place; and based on the many dissatsfied customers who posted their displeasure of this stuff on these very boards, I'm pretty sure that you'd be hard-pressed to prove your statement.

Having said that, you keep throwing out these comparisons by utilizing an unrealistic model which focuses solely on "factory cost," which is an apples-to-oranges comparison because, again, the common collector doesn't have the opportunity to purchase packs and/or boxes at "factory cost."

Shoot, furniture is overpriced; however, if I could get it at factory cost, which is generally 75% less than the retail value set in your neighborhood furniture store, it wouldn't be so bad. But the truth is, unless there's a sale or I know somebody who works there or the manufacturer and/or distributor myself (or I own one), I'm stuck buying the furniture at retail.

It's OK, though. You like to make the numbers work for you despite of the fact that they don't work for most anyone else.

And calling me a Topps shill doesn't obscure the fact that anyone with a calculator can figure out that nine cards @ $500 and one card $10,000 gets you to that magic number of a 90% return on a $1500 "factory cost."

So the truth is, based on your model, that nine out of every 10 packs of Oval Office is a ****** exam in a BGS case, which isn't terrible odds considering what you can get out of that 10th pack; however, to trumpet these numbers the way that you did, to skew them and misconstrue them, is just plain irresponsible.

Good luck.[/quote]

WRONG! Did you know that less than 15 cards out of 99 sold for $500 or less? That makes 85% of cards better.
Your math is very fuzzy sir. Rather than insult what you don't understand, I would ask poliutely YOU do the research before you state irresponsible opnions.

I didnt mean to come across holier than thou, I was trying to bait Crash into a wager he will surely lose. I don't think its my job to spend 10 hours proving what I already KNOW as an industry professional.

Either way, no more to say. The numbers don't lie. Crash's unwillingness to look at the REAL numbers (not 5 packs opened on a message board) speaks volumes. The offer is out there for a wager.

Ive spoken my peace.
BG